Re: [off topic] an amusing side note

2004-11-24 Thread Felix Gallo
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 04:25:14PM -0500, John Siracusa wrote:
 On 11/24/04 3:42 PM, Felix Gallo wrote:
  Well, it's the first time *I've* seen it.
  
  http://otierney.net/images/perl6.gif
  
  I find it difficult to disagree, at the perl6 language level.
 
 I don't :)  Judging by the Perl 6 RFCs, I think that book cover would be
 accurate if the community really did design Perl 6 in the absence of
 Larry.  Fortunately, that's not the case.  I think Perl 6 is a lot cleaner
 than Perl 5 in addition to being much more powerful.

This would doubtless be a very long discussion :), so I will stop
my contribution to the thread with the following notes:

1.  I ran the Obfuscated Perl contest for many years, and even I draw
the line at purposefully obfuscated language design documentation
_release methods_.  Sly obfuscated cuteness has gone from 'rife' to
'pathologically endemic', in both design and presentation.  IMHO.

2.  perl 6 is a lot cleaner than perl 5.  It's also much, much
larger than an already very large language.  I've been programming
and evangelizing Perl in organizations small and gigantic since
4.03x, and my eyes just glaze over at all the unnecessarily
surfaced complexity bound to make reading other people's programs
finally, at last, literally impossible:

http://www.ozonehouse.com/mark/blog/code/PeriodicTable.html

I'm not going to use perl 6.

F.


Re: [off topic] an amusing side note

2004-11-24 Thread Tim Bunce
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 06:30:29PM -0500, Felix Gallo wrote:
 
 2.  perl 6 is a lot cleaner than perl 5.  It's also much, much
 larger than an already very large language.  I've been programming
 and evangelizing Perl in organizations small and gigantic since
 4.03x, and my eyes just glaze over at all the unnecessarily
 surfaced complexity bound to make reading other people's programs
 finally, at last, literally impossible:
 
 http://www.ozonehouse.com/mark/blog/code/PeriodicTable.html
 
 I'm not going to use perl 6.

I doubt anyone will. We'll all be using subsets.

Of course the subset that I use will probably be different from the
subset used by the authors of the modules I'll be using. That's
a potential headache but not a huge problem.

I predict a burst of wild creativity from authors enjoying the
exploration of all the wonderful tools in the perl6 toolbox.

Then, after a year or three of fun, sawn off limbs, and bloodied
fingers (and after a few good books get published) most of us will
converge towards a common subset of accepted good practice.

But we'll know that our new toolbox of choice is far deeper than
our old one and will cope with a far wider range of projects.

Tim.


Re: [off topic] an amusing side note

2004-11-24 Thread John Siracusa
On 11/24/04 7:27 PM, Tim Bunce wrote:
 I predict a burst of wild creativity from authors enjoying the
 exploration of all the wonderful tools in the perl6 toolbox.
 
 Then, after a year or three of fun, sawn off limbs, and bloodied
 fingers (and after a few good books get published) most of us will
 converge towards a common subset of accepted good practice.

...much like what happened with Perl 5...although the last phase has been
hampered somewhat but the utility of some of those early, crazy efforts :)

-John